Re: ArchGenXML thought

Martin Aspeli wrote:

>> In the end, it all works and it's not too bad. It is a mess, though.
> 
> You think?

Most is ok, there are some messy parts though. There are some four 
different methods to get the value of a tagged value, at least two of 
which have the same name but are in different classes. Only both classes 
tend to intermingle a bit and you really have to watch in which class 
you're working.

I still haven't found a way to let my custom methods (for instance in a 
unit test file) stay put in the order in which they're currently in the 
file. Upon every generation, there are some that change places. You'd 
say that a simple sort() would do the trick, but it doesn't. I've tried 
putting the sort() in at least three different places, but no avail :-)

"There are some messy parts" would be much more accurate than "It is a 
mess", so you're right for asking for a better qualification :-)

Many bugs, for instance, are easy to spot with some grepping. The 
logfile generation helps a lot there. The tagged value documentation 
generation helps a lot, too, to keep the code sane.

It just could have been done in a more modular way :-)

Reinout

-- 
Reinout van Rees                       r.van.rees @ zestsoftware.nl
http://vanrees.org/weblog/                  http://zestsoftware.nl/
"Military engineers build missiles. Civil engineers build targets."



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language
that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast
and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642